You are not logged in. Please register or login.

smoke
 Rep: 77 

Re: Superman Thread.

smoke wrote:

Tough to do any Batman movie in the daylight. If they go with some of the comic crossover story lines, it could be really good. I'll never understand why they don't do that more often. The things are sitting there story boarded and ripe for the shooting already.

Me_Wise_Magic
 Rep: 70 

Re: Superman Thread.

A Private Eye wrote:
Me_Wise_Magic wrote:
A Private Eye wrote:

Sounds awesome, although reading between the lines it sounds as though this will be a new interpretation of Batman and not linked to the Nolanverse TDK trilogy. I just hope they don't fuck it up. It could be epic, it will smash the box office whatever but I hope they tell a good story as well rather than just 'ooooh look what we've managed to do' but with no idea what to do with it once they're on screen together.

I completely agree. After I posted this info, I took a step back and realized it may be a little too soon for this kind of movie. I would love at least a sequel to Man of Steel establishing more of the core universe and character development. Then have Batman & Superman come in a few years later and have it work much better in terms of plot, pace, and not having to explain a whole lot either. It makes more sense especially after hearing certain reactions from the press & fans. I don't want this to be a brawl vs. movie either. Having to see which one is the better hero. That is a terrible idea. They need to establish their friendship and have them team up to maybe bring down a Lex with another bigger villain combo. Sure they can argue or maybe get into a small confrontation similar to the encounters in Avengers; but no elseworld Dark Knight Returns fight making either of them to off as a pride hungry douche bag. Which shouldn't be their character traits to begin with in this film universe. I want this succeed and me and others have wanted this for a long time. They just need to do it properly and not rush it. Finding a new Batman shouldn't be that hard. I'm going to miss not having Bale as the caped crusader; but I guess it's time to move forward. I think Levitt would be appropriate for this transition; but if it's another guy that's fine.

I know what you mean, give them chance to tell Superman's story first before you rope in Batman etc. They managed to tell the Batman story pretty well without other superheroes joining in and that did pretty ok at the box office. By getting Batman involved in film 2 of the MOS films it almost looks like they don't have confidence that it can be a success on it's own without playing the ace up their sleeve. Marvel teased the Avengers for about 5 years across 4/5 films before it happened. This looks like they're going to blow their load the first chance they get.

If they go with Levitt it links to the TDK trilogy which could pose a few continuity problems. When is the film supposedly set, everyone thinks Batman is dead, is this his first reappearance or is it known he's back? Not to mention that Nolan's Batman, be it Bale or Levitt is at the end of it all just a guy in a suit, he can be as tough as you like but in a one on one fight against Superman there's only one winner. It may be better if they sever ties with the TDK completely for the sake of moving any Batman/Superman tale they want to tell forward. Also, that way if they do fuck it up they haven't harmed the TDK trilogy 16

Oh I definitely see what you mean by this. Don't want any of that to happen. lol

monkeychow
 Rep: 661 

Re: Superman Thread.

monkeychow wrote:

Wow an interesting development.

I guess decades of comic book writing would prove me wrong, but I've always felt the hard thing with superman story wise is he's just too powerful. I would find him hard to write stories for.

I mean here you have a character that's wholly benevolent (thus removing most moral dilemmas from the plot), can fly, can not be harmed by conventional weapons, in fact generally can't be harmed at all except with kryptonite. To me this limits your plot options to:

1. Superman Vs Someone Else With His Abilities.

2. Superman Temporarily Looses His Power Then Gets It Back

3. Superman Must Woo Lois Lane to be Happy

4. Superman has been turned temporarily evil by Red Kryptonite or some other unusual occurrence.

Don't get me wrong I love superman...just saying I can see why they find it hard to write for...he's not only inhumanly strong but that his personality is also so clean makes very little threaten him....compared to most movies where characters get into dangerous situations and face awkward choices.

metallex78
 Rep: 194 

Re: Superman Thread.

metallex78 wrote:

Superman vs Batman?

I'm with Monkey on this, if Man Of Steel told us anything, its that Superman is unbeatable by ordinary men, why would Batman be any different?

Still, I'd love to see what Snyder can do with Batman, after the great Man of Steel film.

RaZor
 Rep: 32 

Re: Superman Thread.

RaZor wrote:
metallex78 wrote:

Superman vs Batman?

I'm with Monkey on this, if Man Of Steel told us anything, its that Superman is unbeatable by ordinary men, why would Batman be any different?

Still, I'd love to see what Snyder can do with Batman, after the great Man of Steel film.

Actually, in the comic book community, most would say that Batman, given time to prepare and execute a strategy, wins that fight. The rationale being, there have been about a dozen story lines in the comics in which they have been pitted against each other and Batman has done just that.

Batman is just an ordinary man, but he's supposed to represent what any ordinary man could achieve with hard work, intelligence, and technology. The idea being we can accomplish anything if we set our minds to it. Even defeat a superman.

Me_Wise_Magic
 Rep: 70 

Re: Superman Thread.

RaZor wrote:
metallex78 wrote:

Superman vs Batman?

I'm with Monkey on this, if Man Of Steel told us anything, its that Superman is unbeatable by ordinary men, why would Batman be any different?

Still, I'd love to see what Snyder can do with Batman, after the great Man of Steel film.

Actually, in the comic book community, most would say that Batman, given time to prepare and execute a strategy, wins that fight. The rationale being, there have been about a dozen story lines in the comics in which they have been pitted against each other and Batman has done just that.

Batman is just an ordinary man, but he's supposed to represent what any ordinary man could achieve with hard work, intelligence, and technology. The idea being we can accomplish anything if we set our minds to it. Even defeat a superman.

Well for the most part. The Dark Knight Returns is a more of an else world/alternate universe where Superman is almost a tank drone who is informed by the President that Batman has gone rogue and needs to be stopped and believes him. Batman tries to make some sense and Supes doesn't believe him. They fight. Batman wins barely with some Kryptonite, prep time, lots of gadgets, and temporarily weakens Superman. But..at a cost. In the animated film adaptation, Batman almost suffers a heart attack from the stressful fight and Superman realizes this and goes to save him at the last minute. In a fight, Batman would need a shit ton of armor perhaps the Bat (robot suit), a good amount of Kryptonite (which he does have in the Batcave as well as ways to stop the rest of the Justice League when they get out of line). The problem is Superman does hold back his strength in that particular fight or doesn't use the full use of the red sun to strengthen him. He does have a anti-kryptonite suit in the fortress of solitude, various tools/experiments to cure him of any illness, and other alien tech. The thing with this film is well a fight is going to happen; but it shouldn't be the full focus. BATMAN AND SUPERMAN ARE HEROES & GOOD FRIENDS. THEY SHOULDN'T BE FIGHTING. Only when they know one of them is being full of shit or manipulated. They respect and admire one another for what they do. Even though they may not agree with each other on every single issue. The problem with Returns and several areas that include these two fighting is that in reality they shouldn't be fighting. Superman in good continuity wouldn't be some drone taking orders when he knows something is off. He is not a war machine. He won't kill or beat someone up for no reason or just for a disagreement.  He is the symbol of truth, justice, and the American way. Which is what after this Man of Steel movie will develop into and absorb truly in a sequel.  He tries to see the good in people. He is a symbol of what human kind wants to strive for even when he is completely fictional. While Batman as intelligent and quick whited as he is always tries to stand for justice just with his own perspective. ..And the video game, Injustice that opens up another can of worms all together.

Smoking Guns
 Rep: 330 

Re: Superman Thread.

Smoking Guns wrote:

This just sounds silly.

Axlin16
 Rep: 768 

Re: Superman Thread.

Axlin16 wrote:

Actually Me Wise is totally right. Especially with Superman's agreement with the U.S. government at the end of Man of Steel, Superman is EASILY manipulateable. In modern times, that's how that story is done. The government is corrupt and is basically owned by the war industry.

If you can't "buy" Superman and you can't "capture" Superman, you just have to convince Superman that the "Batman" that's fighting for his justice.... is a terrorist.

BOOM


You have the UN and the world since 9/11/2001.

Me_Wise_Magic
 Rep: 70 

Re: Superman Thread.

http://www.deadline.com/2013/08/ben-aff … erman-pic/

The new Batman ladies & gents. I'll keep an open mind about this one. Kind of perplexed abit. With his rise in getting good films out there nowadays.Still need to watch The Town too.  I'll wait for the trailers and the actual bat suit.

P.S. It's extremely ironic cause this guy was one the main choice to helm that failed/canceled JLA movie produced by Weta Digital workshop years ago. I personally liked Daredevil too.

Axlin16
 Rep: 768 

Re: Superman Thread.

Axlin16 wrote:

14


WILL NEVER EVER HAPPEN. Affleck as Batman in the modern-era? No fucking way. And this is not the Michael Keaton argument, like it was in the late 80's.


Affleck WILL NEVER suit up. I won't believe it, until i'm literally watching it, and I already think it's a horrible choice. I've never thought Affleck was a great actor. Might as well call back Clooney with that logic.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB